Need Advice..

vinay · May 20, 2012

[FONT=&quot]Hi Friends, i'm enteringnewly to Dslrs. I have used an old Yashica Film Slr though for a bit.(Never hadAF). I've zeroed in on Nikon D3200 and 35mm prime 1.8g instead of kit lens.Even though I'm not fancied[/FONT]:greenpbl: by 24MP and video capabilities of this cam,butother aspects like the Image processor, sensor, Guide mode and the reviews fromexperts pushed me into this cam. Only worry I've is the absence of AF motor. Iclick for the joy of amazing results. I enjoy shooting Landscapes, nature,portraits, City, Sun,,, all in all general day to day shooting. I findthis cam the best in this price range.
[FONT=&quot]Bottom line-- I'm looking for a cam which gives me the bestphotographs[/FONT] :sexywink:

.(Not keen on Video)
[FONT=&quot]My queries:-[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]1. please dont tell me to go to a store and feel the cameras. Myneed here is your takes.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]2. In this price range is there a better DSLR and lens(35mm)option?(Anything in CANON?)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]3. Is the AF motor absence that a big deal??? Will it affect myLens options that badly in a long run? Even though I dont feel that I cantsurvive without AF. Later if I buy a 70-300 AF f/4-5.6g( I read it wont AF) isit gonna be that difficult without AF???However on the other hand I feel Nikonhas good AF-s lenses now. Or is it wise to go for a cam with built in AF motor,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]4. [/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]I have tried me bestto share my concerns. Kindly suggest me, advice me on any part of my query.Your views,comments or suggestions are much appreciated and would be reallyhelpful for me and newbies like me. Thanks fellas.[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT]:thumbup:

Trever1t · May 20, 2012

1) you know that's sound advice though.
2) I doubt it.
3) It is not a big deal if you only plan to use newer lenses, AF-S. AF-S lenses can be a little more $.
4) Nikons 3000 series are the base DSLR bodies. You might look at the D5100 as well.

vinay · May 21, 2012

Trever1t said:
1) you know that's sound advice though.
2) I doubt it.
3) It is not a big deal if you only plan to use newer lenses, AF-S. AF-S lenses can be a little more $.
4) Nikons 3000 series are the base DSLR bodies. You might look at the D5100 as well.

Ty Trever. Appreciate your reply. AF-s lenses definitely costs more... but in Nikon entry level do I have an option? Thats my question... Will I regret making such a choice? or should I buy a canon with AF motor?

orb9220 · May 21, 2012

should I buy a canon with AF motor?

Why not a Nikon with AF motor. D200 and will meter older Ai or Ais manual glass about $400-$500 used and hefty pro build. A D80 will also has built in motor and a steal at the $350-$450 range same sensor and perfomance as the D200. Best Bang for the buck is the D90 used or refrub can be had for $500-$700 range. Improved ISO handling to 3200 and still very capable against the newer cameras including the D7000.

Alll have CLS Commander flash mode for operating nikon flashes off shoe. Which many consider better than canon flash system.
.

vinay · May 24, 2012

ty orb, waiting for D3200 to hit the stores. Then I'll decide.

EDL · May 24, 2012

I was dead set on a Canon T2i primarily to get the MP-E65 macro lens (I like macro), but then Derrel pointed out that modern Nikon DSLR's can use pretty much any lens from Nikon from 1959 on. No, they won't all auto focus and/or meter, but they all have a manual aperture ring (Canon lenses do not).

From the macro perspective that means I'll be buying a couple lenses and reversing one on a mount for macro, but since the lenses have the manual aperture ring, it's not a problem to set up and use like it would be on Canon equipment. I can do it for relatively cheap compared to the $1,000 price tag for the Canon MP-E65 lens alone.

For me, much of the issue is around price. I simply don't have the money to afford $1500-$2000 lenses or cameras and I don't want to have to buy a body now and then wait 2 years to get an expensive piece of glass. Having the option of a lot of older, cheaper lenses is a plus for me. I don't mind tinkering, I love to tinker.

Bottom line is I will have cheaper options to keep me busy and learning, but still have the option to purchase new, fancy glass if/when I can afford to. Canon would limit that option significantly from a use and cost perspective.

I too have been looking at the D3200. I understand the issues around resolution of the lens and the sensor. 24.2MP doesn't automatically equate to better pictures, but it does provide a lot more ability to crop in on a macro. There's more info and pixels there to push around too. Since macro is what I really like, to me that's a plus and the price of the D3200 is right in line with all the other entry level cameras. Reviews have been favorable and the picture quality too is right in line with the other entry level cameras. High ISO performance isn't top of the line, but that's the case with pretty much all the entry level cameras regardless of sensor density.

The only nitpick I have with the D3200 from what I've seen is that it has no auto exposure bracketing. Sure, you can do it manually, but without it that precludes hand-held bracketing for HDR. Not a deal breaker for me, but it would have been nice if it'd do at least a 3 shot +/- 2 EV bracket. I am kinda scratching my head as to why they didn't include at least that.

Actually, I wish Nikon and Canon would make a "stills only" DSLR. Take out all the movie capabilities completely (I have absolutely no interest in it) and then use the savings to beef up the other goodies in the camera. Not sure how much cheaper that would make it to manufacture though, but certainly there is a price to be paid for having the ability to shoot movies that could potentially be used for better specs elsewhere.

Anyway, that's where I'm at in the purchasing process at the moment. Although I have the green light from the wife to get a camera whenever I want (it's basically my birthday present), I'm still holding off to read more and learn more about lenses, options, etc before I make the purchase. I intend to visit a photo store soon to see if I can get some hands-on with a couple cameras too. I'm trying to be realistic in that an entry level camera and glass isn't going to make pro-level pictures, even if I had some skills to go with it. That too helps me to be comfortable with the idea of a Nikon and then finding and using older lenses (although from what I am reading, some of those older lenses are pretty darn good and not all are cheap...but that is relative really...I can swing $150, or $250 for a good lens a lot easier than I can $1000+). yeah, the Canon and the MP-E65 with an MT-24 flash would be the cat's meow for hand-held flash macro, as far as I'm concerned, but an entry level body, lens and flash is a $2,500 affair, and for a lens that can only do macro...way out of my price range.

Dao · May 24, 2012

Correct me if I am wrong. I thought if someone with a Canon camera and want to use a old manual focus lens that made by Nikon, they can just get a adapter. It's because flange to focal plane distance of the EF mount is shorter than Nikon so no optics is need for the adapter.

EDL · May 24, 2012

I don't know. Just going on what I've been told here, maybe someone can answer for sure?

EDL · May 24, 2012

Actually, I found this:

You can get an adaptor to put Nikon lenses on Canon EOS film and digital cameras.

Canon cameras have a shorter distance between the lens flange and film plane than Nikon. Therefore there are a couple of millimeters left over into which a metal mounting adaptor can fit.

Novoflex makes one in Germany you can get here or here and this place here makes one. Yes, some of it's in Japanese. Zoerk makes some weird stuff also in Germany.

Look out: these things are so weird that the photos at some of the sites erroneously show the even more bizarre reverse adaptor for Canon which couples the electronic contacts from the one end of the lens to the other. The one they'se selling at those links is the one you want which is just a slim metal ring. You want the $200 one. The reverse adaptor you don't want is $400.

Oddly, Nikon manual focus lenses on most Nikon AF cameras are almost useless and provide no metering. These same manual lenses used with these adaptors on Canon EOS cameras provide metering, more function than on most Nikon AF cameras. Strange but true!

For the intrepid you can of course get anything in Japan. See here and here and no, I can't understand Japanese so don't ask me what it says!

Here's a much bigger page with a lot more details.

I bought one of the Roxsen adapters with AF confirmation in September 2007. See my Roxsen review for explicit details.

SRB-Griturn make weird stuff, too.

Have fun!

Ken

I found it at: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/nikcan.htm

I may have to reconsider that Canon T2i....

vinay · May 25, 2012

Ty EDL for the share. Me too waiting for D3200 to hit the store and its DxoMark score. Just to compare with D5100. I think I'm gonna buy either one of these babies.

StandingBear1983 · May 25, 2012

+1 on the D3200

EDL · May 25, 2012

Yeah, I searched and read up on adapters and Canon bodies. Due to the aforementioned focal plane distances, you can indeed mount and shoot Nikon lenses (and some others) on the Canon bodies.

Ok, so now I'm back to considering the Canon. I think I might "splurge" on the T3i instead of the T2i...the extra $100 gets wireless firing of off camera flashes and an articulated LCD.

Someone mentioned the T4i might be coming out soon...sigh.